You are here

On the IGD PSA

So since we have been given the spotlight in your fatwa on It’s Going Down, noting the obvious sin of our utter lack of anarchism, I felt I might as well respond on behalf of the Atassa project. Not that we aim to convince anyone of anything, far from it. Those who have accepted the Message of Bakunin (Peace Be Upon Him) and somehow don’t know that something that doesn’t claim to be anarchism isn’t anarchism will be relieved of their ignorance by your words. So we are sorry we have lost all of those confused readers and their generous donations to our Patreon… wait a second, we don’t have a Patreon, that’s someone else. Never mind.

So there’s no point in dwelling on this. Neither are we expecting fair treatment here. In this journal, in print and online, we discuss eco-extremism, and eco-extremists are proud enemies of the human race who have an insatiable animus delendi (drive to destroy). We don’t carry out eco-extremist action, and we aren’t cheerleaders for it. We have an indirect affinity for it and that is it. So we don’t expect fair treatment from IGD, or the anarcho-primitivists, or the press, or the authorities, or anyone else for that matter. You should hate the eco-extremists, and us by extension. We are worse than Hitler. We are worse than eco-fascists. Nevertheless, we aim to show your inconsistencies just in case you think we have no reply. On the other hand, we won’t spend a lot of time on this, because why bother, really?

They have appointed themselves judge, jury, and executioner; the guardians and enforcers of Truth using a romanticized past to justify their actions. As absolutist authoritarians, they have constructed a theoretical framework that, while ever-shifting and inconsistent, somehow always ends with a justification for why they get to hold a knife to the throats of all of humankind. In short, they think and act like the State.

Again, with the ever-elusive anarchist morality: the insincere application of the Golden Rule. You anarchists are always punching supposed Nazis, trying to doxx people, dreaming of killing cops and bankers, etc. To the average normal person, you’re just as bad as the eco-extremist. You’re not getting any brownie points from those you need to make your revolution for you just because you don’t go “too far”. But I forgot that you social anarchists never get tired of losing, never get tired of lamenting your casualties and your prisoners. And at the end of the day, you condemn everything you don’t like as fascism because thinking isn’t exactly your strong suit.

And of course, all violence is state violence (except whatever you deem as “emancipatory” violence, you and the five other people living in your squat).

Of course, what such condemnation means is a tacit approval of state or civilized violence. For the bourgeois liberal, “terrorist violence” is horrible because only the State can designate people who need to be killed (if you lived in Afghanistan or Yemen, for example, you would have more to fear than just cars; you would also have drones raining down death on you from the skies. But that’s okay, because U.S. democracy approved this.) The leftist and anarchist can criticize eco-extremist action with more integrity, so the reasoning goes, because they too reject the violence of capitalism and the State. Aside from that, however, they create a fantasy world where “the guilty”, rich parasites who they have tried and sentenced to death in their own minds from the comforts of their talk-shops, are killed indiscriminately and even with cruelty, not taking into account that the bourgeoisie too are also husbands, fathers, sons, daughters, etc. And of course, they expect that violence to be minimal, as Revolutions have historically been dainty tea parties where the innocent never, ever get hurt…

Newsflash, Don Scott: Violence preceded the State, and even prevented the State from forming in some places. Just as everything you don’t like isn’t fascism, so every act that repulses you isn’t the State. It’s nice to forgo definitions and go right into the virtue signaling. Your brain must be a tranquil place without all of those pesky distinctions making noise over your righteous indignation.

Walkara was called, “the Hawk of the Mountains,” who sold Indian children from tribes such as the Paiute for guns and other goods from civilization. He would ride and trade as far away as California, and was known to steal cattle and horses, as well as raid caravans. The recently arrived Mormons both feared and dealt with Walkara and the Utes, but were often powerless to stop their barbarism. In trying to prevent the sale of Indian children, the Mormons were witness to the following gruesome scene when Walkara’s brother, Arapeen, was told that they refused to buy the Indian children he was selling:

“Several of us were present when he took one of the children by the heels and dashed his brains out on the hard ground, after which he threw the body toward us telling us that we had no hearts or we would have saved its life.”

The eco-extremist is an opportunist. He is an individualist. There is no cookie-cutter eco-extremist like there is a cookie cutter communist or anarchist or primitivist. Each one is different, just like each crime is different. The modern activist seeks to limit chaos and contingency: the eco-extremist counts on it, even thrives off of it. The masses of hyper-civilized activists, from pacifists to the Black Bloc, seek to move like a Napoleonic column of troops, with discipline, a common goal, and a State-like force confronting the State in a “dual power” situation. These are only as strong as their weakest link. Eco-extremist action is guerilla warfare in the full sense of the term: not just in practice, but also in purpose. The eco-extremist, just like the criminal, fights only for himself, for his own benefit, and with those who fight similarly if far away; those who laud his actions and seek to emulate them in their own circumstances.

But you know, Catalonia, Rojava, etc. where supposed anarchists outright cooperated with the State never fucking happened, am I right? Moving on…

In early statements, they spoke of favorably of anarchism and revolution. Over the course of just a few years and various groupings and splittings, they adopted a firm stance of rejection and reaction. They disavowed anarchism, revolution, leftism, or anything related to the social or human. They proudly adopted the mantle of eco-terrorism and proclaimed their disgust for the likes of John Zerzan or Ted Kaczynski, who they previously praised.

Damn, dude, I know you don’t like ITS and all, but now you’re just making shit up. You don’t even have to scroll down that much on page 1 of this blog to see that you didn’t really think that sentence through. Let’s just do a quick copy and paste:

The old ITS was made up of anarchists, liberationists, and Kazcynskists who took up the insurrectionist discourse of such groups as the FAI even though they never formed part of that movement. They expressed solidarity with anarchist political prisoners and they adhered to politically correct language. They were rationalists, they employed the scientific method with technical language, and they rejected animist beliefs. They were moralists and to a certain extent pedants.

It should be pointed out that both the old and new ITS considered themselves to be indiscriminate terrorists, trolls, and extremely critical of leftism, revolutions, and related themes. They are also critical of themselves.

So was ITS ever anarchist? It had anarchists in it. Did it ever speak favorably of revolution? Hell no. From the start they criticized Kaczynski’s position on revolution… But as they like to say in your circles: I’m not here to educate you. You know where the answers are if you want to find them…

Your bull of excommunicationcontinues:

The ITS phenomenon, while beginning in Mexico, has spread throughout much of Latin America, with groups using the ITS name claiming responsibility for attacks – including attempts at the mass murder of ordinary, working-class people – in multiple countries.

There you go again with your “innocence” and “guilt” motif. It’s the Big Bad Fat Cats destroying the world, and the Big Bad Police defending Big Bad Neoliberal Imperialism from your Molotov cocktails and non-gun-having ass. *Sob* Your beloved workers and oppressed: the New Communion of Saints washed in the Blood of Joe Hill. Poor things, who will defend them from the Big, Bad Eco-extremists? God forbid someone point out that the “working class” too is contaminated with the stain of Original Sin:

If you believe in a dogma wherein human nature is inherently good and salvageable, then of course you are going to blame non-human things (i.e. machines) for corrupting it, while desperately looking past their true (man-made) nature and functionality. If, on the other hand, you appreciate that they are merely physical manifestations of social relations that are a lot more difficult to destroy, you are in a much tougher position, but at least you are being honest with yourself. The former approach is the ideological foundation of anarchism: humans would be just fine if only the State, Capital, Technology etc. would leave them alone. The latter approach, the more realistic one in my opinion, sees that technology and the modern human are intertwined with each other almost to the point of being con-substantial. If technology exists it is because modern humans will it to exist, they love it, and value it with their whole lives. You may dispute this sincere affinity all you like, but here appearances don’t lie.

So yeah, riddle me that. If all power is the People, then why don’t the People overthrow this small cabal of oppressors and go forward into the Utopia Without Domination that will reign unto the ages of ages, Amen? Maybe they like their oppression? Maybe they’re at fault for it, *Gasp!* Stop uttering blasphemies. We can’t have people get discouraged and stop uploading their credit card numbers onto our Patreon, can we?

Mexico in particular has a vibrant clandestine, direct action insurrectionary movement. Mexico is also where 99 percent of all “crimes” go unpunished, where narcos, police, military and politicians either work hand in hand or kill one another and anyone else nearby in the tens of thousands. They also team up against aboveground social movements – repression being the only language the Mexican state speaks. It is not difficult to understand, in a country being gutted by neoliberalism, where appeals to the state are met with batons and bullets, where anarchists are already blowing things up, and where everyone else with an agenda seems to be killing people and getting away with it, why a group like ITS would emerge.

Yes, poor Mexico, tan lejos de Dios… oh hell, you know the rest. How dare these people be disloyal to their poor suffering country, they should show more patriotism instead of saying stuff like this:

You know, Mexico is a steaming pile of shit. It’s conflicted, corrupt, and prostituted to the highest bidder, treacherous, run down, and even though there are people who say that there are “good things” about it, we see more bad things than good to be honest. Really we can’t even know if there person who was imprisoned in that maximum security prison and who escaped was actually Chapo Guzman, or an impostor. That’s for starters. Lies piled upon lies are daily fare here. Personally, I don’t trust anything that the media blabbers about, every one of them is blowing shit out of their ass. That there is a low intensity war going on, that’s for sure. But you can speak of this just not in terms of narcotrafficking, there are also groups, politicians, private interests, etc.

Comrade, how dare they fail in their loyalty to the Glorious Fatherland!? Death to Yanqui imperialism! The beatings will continue until morale improves…

Yet at the same time in Mexico, aside from a few websites, ITS and its actions have not been praised or embraced by anarchists or anyone else. This likely also contributes to the escalating violence on ITS’s part – no one really pays attention to them except to dismiss or condemn.

Why you gotta put me on blast like that?

It seems more likely that ITS is a genuine group that believes what it says.

❤

Whether it has actually done what it says is another matter. Some attacks have certainly occurred, but a curiously large number of ITS attacks fail or go unmentioned anywhere except in their statements. They claim this is due to the police and media conspiring to not call attention to their acts. Yet the typical insurrectionary anarchist direct action is almost always reported with precise information, photos showing the damage caused, and can be verified in corporate media reports. How ITS is so much worse than other direct action groups at carrying out direct actions is an unanswered question.

You do realize that a lot of ITS communiques come with extensive footnotes linking to the media articles describing many of their actions, right? Or that the Chilean media was gripped for weeks after a parcel-bomb was sent to the CEO of one of the largest mining companies in the world (a crime that still hasn’t been solved)? It’s ok, we know that you aren’t really paying attention and you wrote this fatwa half-distractedly in a couple of hours. Just doing your homework for you, feel free to edit your piece and issue a correction. You’re welcome.

But let’s draw this out a bit: the real reason we have no idea about the veracity of these attacks is that, unlike a lot of your compas rotting in Mexican jails, none of these horrible eco-extremists have been caught, have they? So yeah, people got killed, lacerated, threatened, etc. but no one has a clue about who did it, except the people who claim they did it. Hmmm. And did you know there are like whole channels on the Internet that document eco-extremist actions in like four countries? But I know, you’re a busy guy, just letting you know for next time. No worries.

That ITS killed any of the three people they recently claimed to have killed is unlikely. The statement shares no details of the killings and only includes a photo taken from Facebook. Especially with regards to the femicide of Lesvy Rivera at UNAM, ITS is likely seeking to get a free ride on the coattails of a tragedy that has generated considerable action and coverage amongst the anarchists and radicals they hate so much yet whose attention they so desperately seek.

And, pro-tip, maybe “sharing details” of crimes, I dunno, might just help the police catch you. Tell your compas in the slammer I said, “Hi”. I wish them the best.

And now they are claiming to have killed three humans simply because they were human. Will ITS fans continue to distribute the propaganda of a group that by its own admission is not only not anarchist, but proudly terroristic, rejecting of all ethics, morals, or principles of liberation? They solely exist to kill people. It should not have to be explained why such a position does not merit support.

Shit, what if this stuff makes my clicks go down and people stop giving to my Patreon? Dammit, I keep forgetting I don’t have a Patreon, how silly of me. But muh magazine sales! Muh not getting invited to cool conferences! Wait, I never do that shit anyway. Again, never mind. It’s been a long day.

I guess it doesn’t bother me because I’ve been paying attention from the start and know what this is all about. And I kind of believe that people who read this stuff have a vague sense of what it means as well. I know most anarchists and leftists are just in it for the lulz and the feeling of moral superiority, but you shouldn’t presume that for others who have better reading comprehension.

Some defend the publications and discussions (or trolling, as it were) they engender because while perhaps they don’t agree with killing people, the analysis ITS presents is intellectually stimulating and worthy of consideration. If ITS did kill her, Lesvy Rivera can surely appreciate that her brutal murder was found intellectually stimulating for some. It is the peak of colonial, racist arrogance that those from the safety of their U.S. or European homes feel comfortable debating the finer points of an ideology that amounts to brown people killing other brown people.

Oh no, I’m cut to the quick! Anarchist confessional, here I come. Bless me, compañerxs, for I have sinned…

I am not sure I would call this action, “intellectually stimulating,” but I don’t find your virtue signaling very emotionally stimulating. But I am a cold, heartless, Inhumanist bastard, guilty as charged. In sin I was conceived…

Eco-extremism doesn’t seek to break eggs to make an omelette: it seeks to destroy the whole farm, and if eggs get damaged in the process, that’s just the nature of the beast. How many eggs get broken on a factory farm a day?

The second quote from Stalin is: “One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.” And is this not the logic of civilization, of the leftist and anarchist? They can shrug off a whole world being butchered by civilization, they can wave off the deaths of savage peoples who did nothing but defend their land, and they can play video games in their heads of strangling capitalists in their beds, but when they see a bus on fire, or a lab blown up, they scream, “Won’t somebody think of the children!?” (Again from “Collateral Damage”)

And then of course, the modern equivalent of Godwin’s Law (as if one invocation of fascism wasn’t enough):

We eagerly await the publishing on these sites of ISIS or al-Qaida communiques due to their intellectually stimulating critiques of U.S. imperialism in the Middle East.

The only support ITS should be receiving from anarchists is encouragement that they practice their dedication to human extinction on themselves. Just as the fascists of ISIS are meeting a true anarchist response, the fascists of ITS should be called to task, rather than coddled.

Again with your statist anarchists in Rojava, but ok. I think I’ll start a Patreon for all of the poor anarchists who are thrown out of their squats for their supposed ITS support. Could I use your Patreon page as a template? Thanks.

So to sum up really quickly: Eco-extremism isn’t anarchism. It is the enemy of the human race because humans, let’s face it, aren’t all that good to themselves, and they certainly aren’t good to non-humans or Wild Nature. Eco-extremism is Inhumanism. Eco-extremism sees humanity as an expired project that merits extinction. Eco-extremism is the extreme defense of Wild Nature and the slaughtering of the domesticated person within. If you agree with or are intrigued by the following quote, then this is the place for you. If not, It’s Going Down is that way:

All of this is also re-wilding: to return to the primitive in a conflict inherited from our ancestors; to put into practice the tactics that the ancients used but in our own conditions. In fact, the murder that ITS carried out also represents “individualist re-wilding”. The goal of assassinating an UNAM employee was not just to take him out and create negative reactions to this act, but rather with the same act, the members of ITS also murdered the civilized person within, killing little by little with thrusts of the knife those Western values imposed on them from childhood onward.

Comments

It's pretty clear that Abe Cabrera and his cohorts are hostile to anarchists, so why does the collective give them so much space on @news and protect them from the big bad anons who might wish them harm? It's curious that the admins of a purportedly anarchist website find such affinity with anti anarchist edgelords.

You all blowing up people's names. What a fucking dick. Also they are anti-IGD. I haven't heard them going against Anews yet, but maybe because the project deliberately avoids personality? IGD is a trite Trot-like organization. Bunch of fakers and opportunists. They make me want to not be an anarchist about as much as Emile does with his/her/its dumb posts.

Agreed with that last part... Tho I think this social anarchist crowd of Trot are even more giving anarchists a bad name than Emile, who's more a single self infatuated annoyance easy to discard. Unlike these people, he ain't a pervasive, invasive global network of Left pigs engaged in constant slander aad snitching politics against actual anarchs of the anarchoid milieus, and improvising themselves as The Anarchists through series of entirely spectacular and speculative non-activity.

So if ITS were legit enough to be attacking people from this crowd I wouldn't rejoice, yet wouldn't care less.

your point that someone, anyone, needs defending from empty anonymous rhetoric makes me wonder about your intellectual capacity.
we remove empty posts -- if you want a post to stay up, say something about the content. threats and/or shit talking with no actual point to make get removed.
that's us protecting our site from only the most blatant wastes of time. surely that's consistent with anyone's anarchy.

LOL This is funny. I like ITS about as much as I like dousing someone's head with gasoline and setting them on fire. If I said I wanted to murder ITS because I am a child of Prometheus, would that make sense?

Okaaaayyyy... So now we'll have to endure rants from people representing by far the worst, yet opposite tendencies of green jihadism and activist Left populism. Soem pagan god knows if they aren't related... meeting up in the same gay saunas and laughing at the fake dichotomies they're creating to divide radicals. Psychological warfare aliver than ever!

Anyone remember that bit of Oryx and Crake? Where they sit online, getting high and trying to find the most awful sensory stimulus from the bowels of the net? I did something similar, in my late teens through early 20s, staring in to the abyss. Sampled every type of porn, most of which did nothing for me. Watched Zeta execution videos and candid footage of accidental deaths and war crimes and whatever. This was about me, coming to gripes with my own shadow and the grim reality of the human condition. A kind of nihilist therapy, if you will.

And I suspect that's basically what the fascination with ITS amounts to as well, for most of their sympathetic audience. It's ultimately not very meaningful because it's still just the spectacle. The void only held my interest while I was still quite low on the real-lived-experience scale. After seeing a few people die violent, sudden deaths in real life, all my morbid fascination looks not so different from the try-hard goth kids self-harming in high school.

You ever killed anybody? No? Then shut the fuck up about what it means.

My main beef with these terrorists ( those who attack civilians as part of their politics) is they prefer the blunderbuss approach to the sniper approach.
The wide-angle attack on those ranging from computer-store geeks to academics is what I call the Nechaev mistake. Anarchists will know what I'm talking about.
The more narrow attack is targeted towards the top, Robin Hood style. Like APster ( assassination politics) targets the world richest and most powerful men.
If there was any substance to these Prim terrorists they would support net-based prediction markets. I won't hold my breath waiting for that. Its already been 20 fuckin' years already.
Fuck the fakers in politics, man. They ain't news ANYWHERE.
We may all hate the IDG bs artists but asfaik they ain't TERRORISTS yet - are they?
To the extent any of them support Marxism they must be state-terrorists.
Yrs for anarchist news - pr

Who do you call civillian here? Im in full support of groups such as ITS, although critically..but that IGD article just showed how american anarchist are inherently christians. I dont know, but after I saw your antifa got beaten up by right wing, you guys still put this question of violence into some politically correct bullshit? Your state bombed countries and making their life like living in hell...oh no, but you are anarchists, stateless right? Aside your privilege? ITS please do bomb and kill these gringo anarchist tourist.

After I saw Antifa get beat up, I was like, totally in support of indiscriminate murder. I mean, if you're not down with that, you're just exercising your privilege, man! Like, there is no real revolt except random murder! Otherwise you're just a poseur!

Your sarcasm is pretty lame for someone who "owns" the languange and then you gringo anarchista resort into "kill random people?" Do you even read anarchist history, it mostly belongs to your languange and your european ancestors....remember Mario Buda? Emile Henry? Ravachole? No, seriously, you guys have access and all, what are u waiting for? Waiting for the right wing massacred you? And that stupid analogy with Nechaev, do you guys really even bother to read history? The world is filled with your white christian worldview...and you poor US anarchist who doesnt have any privileges, who have to be rich to enjoy banana and pepaya in Bali? All those natural resources you enjoy? At what cost in west Papua, Sumatera, and Borneo? STATE and CAPITAL dont do random violence, but they massacred people to get their point across. And YOU!! At the heart of the machine still shy away from violence? South American anarchists, now they I can understand. YOU gringo anarchitsts is something, a unique snowfake. Christians at best.

Wow. The last time I see it is that YOU NA anarchist aka Antifa were being punched by those right wing who stole your left liberal "free speech" chant! Black blocs? Or just stupid and poor strategy of swarming? And this is the best thing u came up with, with your history, no i guess you never really read, right? Violence in the internet yeah, bravo pale face!

Argumenting Clickbait Series Episode VI: the Hispanic American Identity Wars

"Gringo", as I understand, is a derogatory term referring to White North American people, maybe exclusively USian.

White North American people (and White USians) originally came from Europe.

Latin Americans originally came from.... *drums rolling* ...Europe!

They came to the "American" continent during the same historical periods, and also driven away and with the support of Euro continental empires, mainly from the Spanish, Portugueuse, British and French empires.

So White North Americans are as much "Gringos" to a Peruvian hispanic settler than the French, British or German are to the Spanish or Portuguese. So not making sense too much...

tl;dr for you bird brains... Hispanics, you're also a bunch of chauvinistic settlers with a really really dickhead, macho, sexist mass culture as well, so stfu. There's nothing, absolutely nothing making you any better than whiter Turtle Island settlers.

Hey stirner cultist, you saying "Hispanic culture is [blank]." Is also a "spook" or from the perspective of identity, an essentialist fallacy. You're embarrassing yourself same as this douche who thinks that anarchists across 3 different countries are somehow related to an antifascist street battle in Berkeley.

Historical background of an ethnic-cultural group is not a spook, but a verified sociological denominator. That, unless you consider ANY ethnic-cultural group as a spook. In that case it becomes pointless to talk about hispanics, North Americans, settlers, men, women, humans, Terrans, etc.

What's essentialist, essentially, is to be deterimining people accordingly with these group identities. That's not even what sociology does (not at least the non-conservative, constructivist schools). There's trying to understand and explain people PARTLY through culture and historical background, and there's framing them into boxes according to forged identities that turn them into spooky impersons, which is basically essentialist politics. These are two tendencies.

Now now. I'm from south east asia stupid, your half-brained stirnerian approached are so stupid that its hard for me to read. Im provoking you pale faces, beaten by the same hillbilly christians that stole your precious history. Berkeley antifa? Haha

Abe. You said it wouldn't be a long response and that you weren't trying to convince anybody of anything. You also said you don't expect fair treatment. However, it was a long response meant to convince people that you are being treated unfairly. It read like someone throwing a tantrum about being misunderstood, but then you seem like the salesman-type who will take any opportunity to get in front whomever you can to sell your product.

What is the difference between funding a site through donations (IGD) and funding a site through selling printed paper and IT services (A-News)?In the end, people part with their money for content they desire.

Maybe an ITS Patreon would be a good business move to fund your Christianized apocalyptic extinction of the human race (forgive us Lord, we are not worthy of your magnificent Wild Nature). I'm sure people would happily pay for you and your eco-extremist psychobabble to go extinct... and take emile with you.

The people who say they have nothing in common with anarchists/ism fool themselves. If one were to remove the bs topping, the over romanticized relation to nature, indigenous past, anti-rationalism, mysticism and so on, the base of the cake would remain something of an individualistic anticiv nihilism, which is not something that is exactly rejected by anarchists, now or in the past. They remain relevant, that's why they get posted here. If you can't stomach reading about ideas, of any sort, that clash with your own you're a sad fuck.

(not the book) of "creeping fascism" is exactly in the possibility (some would say likelihood) that it can indeed come in whenever people feel self-righteous (not that self-righteousness is fascism, but that it is an indicator that other things are going on). so to the extent that anarchists feel self-righteous, your mockery is misguided.
tl/dr: be funnier

"the base of the cake would remain something of an individualistic anticiv nihilism"

For the last to paradigms, yes, but there's absolutely nothing individualistic with Atassa or ITS's drivel and sociopathic actions. They are all, on the contrary, rooted in tribalist mindset and identity politics.

The fact they do not allow themselves to question the very act of killing random people over a bunch of fanatical beliefs about "the wild" is inconsistent with asserting their personal sovereignty in relation to a set of ideas or beliefs. And if you consider nihilism as a cognitive process of ethics-building, that also is not involved here.

So Atassa are way closer to, say, antigentrification activists or liberal identity politicians than they are to anticiv nihilists (if the latter exists). They just won't let rationality, critical thinking and self-determined ethical analysis in the way of a worldview that's fueled by herd mentality and resentment.

Even children would do better than this, as their their affect hasn't been fucked up by society to a point of being so dominated by hate.

Even gorillas would do better... as they don't see any OBJECTIVE cause for hurting or killing other random gorrillas. Inter-gorilla violence is always driven by petty disputes, like over food or relational domination.

You're right about the decline but a bit hazy on the why IMHO. It's not any conspiracy but part of a larger problem with anarchist discourse in our era. A lot of pundits and theorists put tons of energy in to building up anti-leftist theory within the discourse over the last decade or so and this is the result. It's a cul-de-sac of egoist/nihilist navel gazing and some seepage of what's being called alt-right, which is mostly just an incoherent cesspool of social media noise with hyper-nationalism being perhaps the only fixed characteristic.

Why did these pundits and axe grinders want to push anarchist thought away from the left? Some of them had legitimate reasons but after watching this happen for many years, I'd argue that the cure is worse than the disease.

it was the response to the changing dynamics of the monetization and weaponization of data in the context of a projected life (onto a glow-screen, shrinking and flattening of contexts and experiences) that shifted the narrative from parts of livea to be labelled as the whole of life from one set of boxes to another set of boxes called identity politics. NONE of the underlying issues were to be addressed as the boxes became the most important part. the left called for every human (forget the vastness of other species, humans being only one part of the whole) to be boxed into Identity Politics, and rightists stepped up to carry out the program, agreeing such boxes represented 'the good.'.

both the right and left are authoritarian models of reality, and the model of reality is not reality. both take human Thought as the sole animating, sole organizing force for life on this planet, as more real than reality. and THAT is the problem. leftism has the same blinders, and is so sacred that the term means position people sat in parliament during the french revolution <-----that is the narrowness of these so-called views. left and right are two sides of the SAME coin, and that's what you leftists are fucking ignorant of (instead needing to DIVIDE people into being ruled by the ideology of the Good or the Bad).

all we have is now
relations are all there are
and every life form shares the same living space

yep, the above realizations about shared living space gave rise to alt-right ideology. fuck off!

Terrorism is described as attacks on unarmed civilians in the name of a political cause. So it may be Right. Left, Religious or anti-civ / nihilist.
The form thats done most damage since 1917 is state-terrorism.
We don't get to change the meanings of commonly accepted words yet.
As for nihilism, why don't we leave that to the professionals?
State-terrorists specialize in cynical nihilism & get constant practice with it.
The state remains the best ' civ' to be ' anti'. If you're feeling suicidal - homicidal take it out on a cop or a screw - NOT a civilian.

Terrorism is only about the use of violence for the aims of causing pressure on an adversary party, to influence its behavior. It's not just about harming unarmed civilians, even if it can be. It is using the threat of violence, "terror" as a means of political manipulation on other people.

So in this context I don't even think ITS can be deemed "terrorists" as they clearly said they did not intend to change anything or collapse civilization. I'd rather just them murderers, or a DEATH SQUAD.

I understand that anarchists see cops and screws as irredeemable; but surely the common person is, from an anti-civ perspective, also irredeemable. I guess I can see both angles.

If ITS were attacking the poor, I could see your analogy a little more clearly, specifically how they are "evident" enemies.

As for what they do, surely the "proper" nihilist response is whatever and fully consequential without morality. If they get away with it, so be it; if they do not, so be it. Meh. Surely rat you see that it is impossible to articulate how it is that what they do is wrong, independent of our circular prattle that "such is what we do". So is that the point here, to once again make a big in-out circle to define our friends and (so) enemies? To do the margarine work of producing group think propaganda?

HUGE problem with your logic about pigs versus "average citizens". It should be obvious but cops and screws make a complex decision and dedicated effort to be the goons of the rich, whereas this hypothetical culpability of a "civilized" person is ambiguous to say the least.

... The point is that when you're going to do something as drastic as killing someone, it shouldn't be because you think MAYBE they might represent this abstract idea that you hate. Otherwise, you're in good company with the likes of the Khmer Rouge, smashing babies against trees. Note: this might appear to be an appeal to morality but it's not. It's only that I hate shitty logic, especially as the rationale for drastic action.

" a larger problem with anarchist discourse in our era. A lot of pundits and theorists put tons of energy in to building up anti-leftist theory within the discourse over the last decade or so and this is the result..."

Its easy to say we threw the anarchist baby out, but darling, look where the actual fucking Nazi came in!
That's right. The actual fucking Nazi came in through the most MARXIST-FRIENDLY Portal in our space, ecology, movement, milieu, scene, whatever.

Now I say " ONE MORE EFFORT IF YOUSE WANNA BE FREE POST-LEFTIST ANARCHISTS! "

Post-left anarchism is now actually essential - its not even optional anymore. TINA. We can't go on with Wayne Price types pretending to preen, pose and posture as anarchists.

I'm kinda with you on this. We can't really understand the problems with the Right and fascism if we don't also understand the issues of the Left and social-democracy... They're related and always get to meet and support each other at some point.

That makes no sense old man. Every political tendency under the sun has produced scumbags that misrepresent themselves. Has nothing to do with the set of theories that they claimed to have been influenced by ...

yeah.. maybe you should look into anarchist history. If you did you'd note a distinction between leashed nihilism and unleashed nihilism. Call it what you will; it opens possibilities beyond the lame parades lefties tend to advocate.

having read 'going clear,' and dug deep into scientology your comment is way off. religion could be broken down as: self-improvement. scientology falls under this, and is indeed a religion. one could make a convincing case about what other human group activities fall under religions: sports, financialization, scientism, etc... if not a religion, aspects of facebook are religious in group devotion, membership, fellowship, sacrement of photo tagging, consciences of devotees monitored by server gods...

Religion rejects rationality when it comes to metaphysics in general, and ontology in particular, in favor of supernatural explanations. Scientology comes along and offers seemingly more rational explanations for metaphysical questions. Ron Hubbard thought if people were stupid enough to reject rationality for metaphysical questions, then he could make up just about anything (e.g. space aliens) and some people would believe it.

Anarchism rejects the morality and value of authority and power when it comes to socio-political relations, in favor of egalitarianism. Nihilism comes along and offers seemingly more amoral and value-free explanations for socio-political questions. Nihilists figure if people are stupid enough to reject morality and value for socio-political questions, then they could make up just about anything (e.g. nothingness) and some people would believe it.

It's not that religion rejects all rationality, just like it's not that anarchism rejects all morality. Nietzsche warned about the dangers of nihilism. The point, for him, was to eventually reconfigure new values.

Wrong. "Nihilism" and "nihilists" are two different things. A stronger nihilist position sees the opposition to morality as one not of wars, battles and struggles, but rather a point of note. Why one choses not to embrace dumb ideas can be influenced by a critique of morality. It need not be an exoteric issue.

A moral critic need not spread the good word or rally others to their side. Just the same, recognizing the futility of avoiding all moral positions is just as nihilist, so you are presenting a bit of a strawman.

Nietzsche is not trying to take down nihilist philosophy. He's instead seeing a general condition in society. You fall into the same error as Zerzan here in regards to nihilism.

Who are these people? Do they have wives,sisters and brothers,aunts and uncles,or cousins? Do they have children? Are they included as being part of the human race of which ITS and their apologists claim to be "proud enemies"? If not,why not? Are not the little ones just incipient adults who will eventually join the ranks of the hyper-domesticated? Why not nip the matter in the bud. What's the matter? Feeling a little uneasy in the gut? Has your inner-Hitler failed you? There is nothing Eco about the Eco-Extremists. They are just extreme nihilists who pretend they know or care about "wild nature". As for the contradictions in anarchist theory and practice, we don't need ITS or their cheerleaders at Atassa to point them out.We are well aware of them.But thanks for the schoolmarm corrections.The Extreme Nihilists Tending Toward The Inane are among the most hopelessly domesticated humans on the planet.

If folx want to do as they will, why the worry that such denies your desires? Isn't the denial of desire just what it means to be legalistic? Whence the civilized law in anarchy-land? Anarchists are just cops of a different order.

Such may very well not be what you do; but surely there isn't much beyond that supporting that but table thumping and question begging. To be lawless means to be anti-moral. To be lawless means... ??

I just don't care about what they do; but it bothers me that anarchists seem to desire legislation. On that note, because I wouldn't want to be friends with cops, I wouldn't want to be friends with anarchist moralists.

This shit so good. Fuck that dumbass igd article. Too dumb but this shits hilarious and makes quiet a few good points. People trying to control the name of anarchy beyond silly. Anarchy lives. Thanks for the lols.

I was at a reading group recently and left feeling really sad and depressed. I realized that a lot of the problems with the dialogue and my reaction to it that made feel that way after, had to do with the Bay Area (or at least the west coast of the states), with its toxic cliquish childish feudish bullshit (LBC/Bastard/whatever and IGD), being way overrepresented in anarchist print and media. Someone says some dumb generalizing statement that lacks any imagination about "society" and how they think positive projects are stupid, IGD takes the bait and headlines a stupid shallow critique article taking marching orders from appelists in France in an indirect response. And too many of us who have nothing to do with these interpersonal dramas pay way too much attention to it. Shits dumb.

As for ITS, I'm no more interested in them than I am any any Stalinist Guerrilla. They might do a cool thing or two on a rare occasion, but their overall perspectives (and this can be applied wholesale to eco-extremism as well) are just kinda gross and are in no way interesting to me or relevant in any way towards the projects I want or have. Frankly I think the worst thing anarchists could do would be to give them a platform by making them an issue. It seems to me it's just a matter of time before they realize they are having no effect on the overall human population and start going after anarchists as a social group they can effect the population of, and who they hate as "utopians".

you are fucking idiots and fucking immature. Don't work your daddy issues out on society. get therapy ( whatever flavor) or at the least get a fucking life. The doom and gloom is boring. Get out of your room and off the internet more often.

Hear hear! Sitting on the edge of your seat, waiting for the next bit of nihilist/eco-extremist media to consume is akin to only being able to get yourself off to the darkest, freakiest porn because you're so jaded. You think you need to keep vicariously edge-lording about who's the baddest on the planet but actually you just need to turn off the computer for awhile and detox.

I can usually smell a fascist from a mile away and the "eco-extremist" scent is ripe. Only a small amount of lurking around can find egoist individualist nihilist rhetoric masking the underlying desire to just kill everybody and build a tribe in the remains. It is ecofacist because its arrogant and misguided. Self possessed authority that can chose who lives and dies. Forget trying to win popular support. How about decent targeting? I mean random girl at a university? There are millions of cops, scientists, politicians, and better yet billionaires that you can have a playdate with instead of traumatizing and boring us with bombing the innocent. Its just a little bit of advice I hope someone translates into spanish. By the way its best to stay away from Varg because ya know he is a nazi. http://goblin2xsbqonuv5.onion/u/nahual/
Otherwise best of luck.